Despite what you may have seen screamed and bloviated on social media, there were no losers in the Freddie Freeman-to-the-Dodgers drama. There are no bad guys and there are no enemies. It was just the business of baseball.
Freeman got what he wanted, the Dodgers got what they wanted and the Braves got better for longer. That's the reality-based, emotionless takeaway from perhaps the most surprising free-agent outcome of the offseason. But there's definitely an emotional element to all this, and I'm not trying to diminish it. I just don't think it will be as potent or long-lasting as some in Atlanta expect.
MORE: Breaking down Freddie Freeman's contract with the Dodgers
Freeman and the Dodgers agreed late Wednesday to a six-year contract worth $162 million. When factoring in state income taxes, the money is roughly equal to what the Braves reportedly offered him in a five-year deal. But that sixth year was the sticking point. The Braves apparently weren’t willing to go that long for a 32-year-old, but Freeman felt he was worth it. The Dodgers agreed, and that’s why the 2020 NL MVP will play in Los Angeles through at least 2027. The total package checked major boxes for the Southern California native, so he understandably took it.
The Braves, meanwhile, realizing earlier this week that Freeman wasn’t coming back, moved aggressively to acquire first baseman Matt Olson from the A’s, in the process parting with big-name prospects Cristian Pache and Shea Langeliers. Olson, who is four years younger than Freeman, is essentially the same player, maybe even better. Imagine de-aging Freeman by four years and then signing him to an eight-year $168 million contract. That's basically what the Braves have done with Olson, and it was a smart move. Not to mention that the lower annual cost allowed the Braves to make more moves to improve — re-signing postseason hero Eddie Rosario and signing reliever Collin McHugh, with still more money to spend.
Combine these moves with the return of Ronald Acuña Jr. and the World Series champs are even better than they were last season, meaning optimism in Atlanta should flow like Coca-Cola on a hot day at the ballpark. Winning cures a lot of ills, and the Braves will do a lot of winning in 2022 and beyond.
But that doesn’t mean many Braves fans aren’t mad about Freeman leaving. Just check Twitter. Some fans are downright seething, upset that he would seemingly turn his back on the city that helped make him a star.
Traitor.
He's dead to me.
I can't wait to boo him.
To those people I offer a snarky question for you to ponder: Why is your support of an athlete contingent on him putting your emotional needs first?
But if you take emotion out of it, it's fairly easy to believe the Braves got the better end of this saga. Long-term contracts to aging stars usually don’t end well. The tales of Albert Pujols, Miguel Cabrera and Josh Hamilton are just three recent examples. This doesn't mean Freeman is destined for the same fate, but there's also nothing to suggest that he'll reverse the trend. That's why I'm fairly certain that, six years from now, Braves fans will be glad that a 34-year-old Olson is manning the bag instead of a 38-year-old Freeman.
MORE: These five MLB fan bases have post-lockout blues
Of course, we're not living in 2028. It's still 2022, and Freeman likely has a few strong years in him. Maybe he helps lead the Dodgers to another championship or two, or maybe they don't go back to the World Series for the rest of the decade. Maybe the Braves don't go back for five years, but then win three straight. You never know.
Baseball, more than any other sport, is beautifully unpredictable. But it offers plenty of room for hope, and we saw that on display in the choices the Braves and Freeman made this week.
Just as a baseball season is a marathon and not a sprint, so are long-term contracts. We can't predict the future. We can only look at the evidence before us and make an informed judgment.
Ultimately, the Braves bet on Olson and Freeman bet on himself. Both were right to do so.
